Here's what I was thinking in the second and third periods of the Sharks' 2-1 season-ending Game 7 loss to the Kings: The Sharks were three points away from having home-ice advantage in this second-round series.

That was rather important tonight, wouldn't you say?

In fact, Sharks coach Todd McLellan added his own note to that after the game... This was in some ways an 8-game series, McLellan said, because the Sharks lost the regular-season finale in LA.

That's the only way the Kings ended up up with 59 points (and the West's 5th seed) and the Sharks 57 (and the 6th seed), and yes, the home teams won every game in this series and both teams looked very different when they moved from their home buildings to the road.

I know you can't realistically flip home-ice in a 2nd round like that, because in that scenario, the Sharks would've played St. Louis (and maybe lost) in the first round and the Kings would've played Vancouver.

But the Sharks and Kings proved in this series that the team with home ice was the team that had every advantage. And that literally was decided by the last game of the the regular season... which decided this series, in large part.

That three-minute spell in the second period... when the Kings got their two goals... probably doesn't happen at HP Pavilion, right?

But it did happen, it was at Staples Center, and there's nothing the Sharks can do about it now.

Advertisement

Beyond the game analysis, I'll make one general point about this team and this ending: This Sharks team was grittier, tougher and just plain better suited for the Stanley Cup playoffs than most of the previous eight editions of the Joe Thornton Era.

If it had finished first or second in the regular-season standings and carried home-ice advantage at least into the second round, THIS Sharks team would have been a serious threat for the Cup.

And it wouldn't have blown up in the early rounds as a high seed, as we know several previous editions have done after glittering regular seasons.

This year's group just played and felt more like McLellan's kind of team than any of four previous squads he took into the postseason, because...

*This Sharks team had the right veteran-young guy mix and (until this series) some multiple-line depth.

*Had Antti Niemi steady in the goal.

*Had Logan Couture rising as the new centerpiece with good components on his line around him—Patrick Marleau and Joe Pavelski (or Raffi Torres when he was not suspended);

*Had veterans Scott Hannan and Brad Stuart playing terrifically in the back, and Dan Boyle still in his prime offensive mode;

*And had Thornton mostly running on high-octane through the playoffs alongside Brent Burns and TJ Galiardi.

This season's team just felt more dangerous (to me at least) and more balanced than the previous ones.

But the Sharks had a terrible run for a stretch in the regular season, they needed to turn it up just to get the 6th seed, and though that certainly didn't matter against Vancouver in the first round... it mattered against the Kings, and not having home-ice sure mattered Tuesday night.

That plus having to go against Jonathan Quick, the best goaltender in the universe.

Oh, and plus watching Torres get suspended for the series after his hit on Jarrett Stoll (though it also knocked Stoll out for at least the rest of the series)... and the Torres absence tightened up those Sharks lines.

This was NOT a soft Sharks team and it wasn't a soft ending. Just wasn't.

That's something.

* Because this team achieved as much as it did and played as consistently hard as it did—and because Doug Wilson already made some fairly significant moves during the season—I just don't see an efficient way to blow it up and hit "re-set."

Couture is the foundation, along with Burns, Pavelski, Niemi and Marc-Eduoard Vlasic.

There's Thornton, Marleau, Boyle and Torres as the veteran group.

Anybody you might want to trade has a no-movement clause. I just don't see how you blow this up... especially when I think the chemistry is at a very high point.

San Jose Sharks defenseman Dan Boyle celebrates his goal against the Los Angeles Kings during the third period in Game 7 of the Western Conference semifinals in the NHL hockey Stanley Cup playoffs, Tuesday, May 28, 2013, in Los Angeles. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)

You might not have the best talent in the league if you hold onto this roster core as Thornton, Boyle and Marleau edge out of their prime years... but the Sharks have had some of the best talent (minus some of the grit) in past years, and we've seen how that has failed them, too.

I think they keep what they have—and keep McLellan and Wilson for sure—and see how far Couture can take them.

* Some of this, I guess, will depend on how Thornton accepts the focus shifting from him to Couture, but some of that happened already this season, and he was fine with it, from what I can tell.

He's still the captain and will be the captain for the foreseeable future. He can still turn his game up at times—as he did in Games 3 and 4, especially, in this series.

He's a good guy, he's a leader, and he can adjust to the Couture Era.

Because Thornton knows:

*How good Couture is and will be;

*And that the Sharks have let this happen organically—they haven't pushed Couture over Thornton, they've respected Thornton in every proper way, and he has to appreciate that.

By the way, Thornton didn't play so great in the third period tonight—maybe he was slowed by an injury? I am not at all blaming anything on him.

Maybe when the focus shifts to Couture, and a little off of Thornton, the Sharks captain won't have to hear every little thing about how he plays in Game 7s, and maybe that will be a tiny relief.